“Madam Speaker, the member mentioned the Pacific link pipeline and some of the other projects that the federal government has undertaken, but I want to read a quote from the environment minister’s website, which says that she has “taken a strong stance against oil sands expansion, and has promoted the critical need for a transition from fossil fuels to a low-carbon economy” and that “She has shared the priorities of local environmental groups with her colleagues in Ottawa.” With the environment minister’s actively telling people that she is against oil sands expansion, how can the member actually stand up and support a pipeline that increases oil production in the oil sands to get out to the west coast?”
Statement grade
A+
The average of Signal, Relevance, Respect and Clarity.
Average 96 / 100
A score under 50 is red. Choose a measurement to see where it lost points and why; choose it again to clear.
Reasoning 38%Claims 45%Promise 17%
This view breaks the statement into its steps and names what each one does.
Madam Speaker, Reasoning · 35 wordsthe question is whether we can do both.Can we walk and chew gum?We need to do both.The fact is that we need to provide clean alternatives within the system as we proceed.Claims · 41 wordsThere is a demand.We have the resources.Canada’s prosperity is dependent upon its ability to provide some of our critical minerals, including fuel and energy from the tar sands.We are already a huge producer of energy around the world.Promise · 16 wordsWe will continue to be, and we will continue to provide alternates, including clean energy alternatives.Vague promise
